Disappointment - The Human Rights Council

June 18, 2007, marked the end of a disastrous first year for the newly created UN human rights body, the Human Rights Council. Created in 2006 to replace the discredited and politicized UN Commission on Human Rights, the Council was meant to elevate the status of human rights within the UN structure. (As an intern for the Lutheran World Federation, I observed and reported on the reform discussions in 2005.)

At that time, NGOs were optimistic about this opportunity to take Kofi Annan's mandate to elevate human rights as one of the three main pillars of the UN's work and create a body that could effectively hold states accountable for ensuring their commitments to international human rights treaties and conventions. One year after the creation of the HRC, its poor record makes me wonder whether things have only gotten worse for the protection of human rights through the United Nations.

The HRC was meant to be composed mainly of states with stellar (at least, better than average) human rights records. As the UN mantra goes "No state has a perfect human rights record..." True, but that does not mean that reasonable people cannot discern a difference in the human rights conditions of the citizens of Norway versus those of say, Burma. Infighting over membership criteria left much of the requirements for admission toothless, and states ranging from Cuba to Azerbaijan are members. Because of the paltry membership requirements, the U.S. voted against the council in 2005, and chose not to run for election in 2006.

Whether as a member the U.S. could have exerted necessary influence to promote action against the worst international offenders is debatable. It seems the Council is determined to protect state interest at the expense of individual rights, with only one state exempted for strong sanctions, Israel.

At the close of its first year, the Council placed Israel on permanent indictment on the Council's agenda. In the words of Canadian Parliamentarian, Irwin Colter, such treatment "concluded a week - and year - of unprecedented discriminatory conduct." To date, the Council has issued 9 resolutions condemning Israel and zero for any other state. Well, I guess things aren't so bad in the Sudan. In fact, its government was the co-sponsor of one of the many resolutions condemning Israel.

The work of the Council presents a sad state of affairs for international human rights. It parted with behind the scenes maneuvering that eliminated human rights investigations in Belarus (opposed by the IHF) and Cuba.